throbber
From:
`Sent:
`To:
`Cc:
`
`Subject:
`
`Dear Board,  
`
`Lesovitz, Jeffrey <JLesovitz@bakerlaw.com>
`Friday, June 28, 2019 3:22 PM
`Trials
`Goettle, Daniel; Rocci, Steven; Guest-TekIPR; 'BoxNomadix@knobbe.com';
`'Doug.Muehlhauser@knobbe.com'; '2dgm@knobbe.com'; '2whs@knobbe.com'
`IPR2019-00211, IPR2019-00253 -- Request for Authorization to File Motion to Submit
`Supplemental Information
`
`Petitioner Guest Tek Interactive Entertainment Ltd. respectfully requests authorization from the Board to promptly file a 
`motion to submit supplemental information under 37 CFR § 42.123(a) in IPR2019‐00211 and IPR2019‐00253. The 
`supplemental information that Guest Tek seeks to submit is a supplemental affidavit from Gerard Grenier, Senior 
`Director of Content Management of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 
`
`Specifically, Guest‐Tek included a first affidavit from Mr. Grenier as exhibit 1012 to the petition in both proceedings to 
`establish public availability of the 98‐010P Report (exhibit 1007) as prior art. In Patent Owner’s preliminary responses, 
`Patent Owner contended that Mr. Grenier, among other things, never stated that the 98‐010P Report was publicly 
`available at the relevant time, but only offered “vague or irrelevant statements.” Paper 5 at 30. Patent Owner also filed 
`objections to the 98‐010P Report and Mr. Grenier’s affidavit. Paper 8.  
`
`While Guest Tek disagrees with Patent Owner’s contentions and objections regarding Mr. Grenier’s first affidavit, and 
`believes that the affidavit (along with various other evidence submitted with the petitions) sufficiently establishes public 
`availability of the 98‐010P Report, Guest Tek nonetheless obtained a supplemental affidavit from Mr. Grenier that 
`specifically addresses the purported issues raised by Patent Owner as to the first affidavit. Guest Tek timely served the 
`affidavit as supplemental evidence in response to Patent Owner’s objections. Guest Tek now seeks authorization to also 
`submit the affidavit as supplemental information.  
`
`In sum, Guest Tek respectfully requests the Board’s authorization to file a motion to submit Mr. Grenier’s new affidavit 
`as supplemental information in IPR2019‐00211 and IPR2019‐00253. Guest Tek’s request satisfies the requirements of 37 
`CFR § 42.123(a) because (1) it is made within one month of the date the trials were instituted in IPR2019‐00211 and 
`IPR2019‐00253 and (2) the supplemental information is relevant to a claim for which trial has been instituted (i.e., 
`invalidity ground 2 of Guest‐Tek’s petitions). If authorized, Guest Tek’s motion will be promptly filed and will comply 
`with the relevant rules. Also, although a copy of the affidavit is not attached to this email, a copy can be emailed to the 
`Board if it would be helpful.  
`
`Patent Owner has stated that it opposes Guest Tek’s request to submit supplemental information. The parties are in the 
`process of determining their availability in case the Board would like to conduct a conference call to discuss this matter.  
`
`Respectfully submitted, 
`
`Jeff 
`
`Jeffrey W. Lesovitz
`Partner
`
`
`Cira Centre
`2929 Arch Street | 12th Floor
`Philadelphia, PA 19104-2891
`
`IPR2019-00211
`IPR2019-00253
`Ex. 3001
`
`1
`
`

`

`T +1.215.564.2406
`
`jlesovitz@bakerlaw.com
`bakerlaw.com
`
`
`

`
`2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket